Thursday, October 17, 2013

unconstitutional Senate bill designed to end government shutdown

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid announced the Democrat-lead Senate has constructed a budget bill that will end the government shutdown and temporarily raise the debt limit so that the federal government can go another trillion dollars into debt.  Republican Speaker of the House John Boehner said the House of Representatives should be voting on the bill on Thursday.  Speaker Boehner expects the bill to pass the House.

Article I, Section 7 of the United States Constitution requires that, "All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives. "  The clause then goes on to say that the Senate can add amendments, but it does not allow the Senate to create budget bills.  This mechanism is in place for a reason.  The House of Representatives is the voice of the people, and giving that House of Congress the power of the purse strings. What this means is if the people have a problem with something any part of the government was doing, through their representatives they could starve the action, or program, of money.  Defunding, as attempted by the TEA Party Republicans, was the whole point.  President Obama sees such a power as obstructionism.  The founders saw it as a way for the people to check the federal government, and protect themselves against tyranny.

If the Republicans of the House of Representatives want to uphold their oath to the Constitution, they will reject this bill on the grounds of its unconstitutionality.  Unfortunately, the likelihood of that happening is not very good.

We will see.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

You need to do your research before you make these comments. The Bill was HR 2775 which originated in the House on 9-12-13 and was sent to the Senate. The Senate amended the bill and sent i back to the House on 10-16-13. The amended bill was then passed by the House and sent on to the President for his signature. It started as an appropriations bill and ended as an appropriations bill therefore it was done in accordance with the Constitution.

Douglas V. Gibbs said...

The house bill was gutted, and then essentially became a Senate Bill, then they said it was amended. They say it technically fulfills the requirement of originating in the House, but it really didn't because nothing of the original bill remains intact.

Anonymous said...

Show me in the Constitution where it says that the original bill has to be intact, in whole or in part, and I will agree with you. I agree it doesn't meet the spirit of the Constitution but it is not Unconstitutional